BBO Discussion Forums: Valuation and Preferred Treatment - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Valuation and Preferred Treatment

Poll: 1D - 1S; 2S - ? (43 member(s) have cast votes)

1D - 1S; 2S - ?

  1. Pass (4 votes [9.30%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.30%

  2. 2NT (Spade length and min/max ask) (5 votes [11.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.63%

  3. 2NT (Some other game try) (3 votes [6.98%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.98%

  4. 3[sp] (Non Forward Going/Preemptive) (3 votes [6.98%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.98%

  5. 3[sp] (Invitational) (14 votes [32.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 32.56%

  6. 4[sp] (12 votes [27.91%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.91%

  7. Other (Please explain) (2 votes [4.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.65%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2008-July-31, 01:43

Does anybody think it is a good idea to try for 3NT from partner's side? Does anybody have a method to do so?
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#22 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2008-July-31, 09:19

han, on Jul 31 2008, 02:43 AM, said:

Does anybody think it is a good idea to try for 3NT from partner's side? Does anybody have a method to do so?

Yes and no.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#23 User is offline   dake50 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,211
  • Joined: 2006-April-22

Posted 2008-July-31, 09:43

For me, 3S asks for primes: A/K(primes) not Q/J(quacks) needed, so 3S. Expect 3 primes to go 4S.
0

#24 User is offline   jillybean 

  • hooked
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,371
  • Joined: 2003-November-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:Multi

Posted 2008-July-31, 09:47

3♠ blame transfer
4♠ maybe, its a tough one
“It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult.”
0

#25 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,772
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2008-July-31, 14:25

gnasher, on Jul 31 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

Cascade, on Jul 31 2008, 01:21 AM, said:

Isn't there a flaw in that losing trick count argument.

Isn't there a flaw in all Losing Trick Count arguments?

When playing with a partner who was a strong advocate of LTC I discovered the major advantage of this system of evaluation.

After making a poor bid which resulted in a failing contract or a missed game I could say something like ...

"I had to bid this way I had 8 losers"
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#26 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2008-July-31, 14:30

I have a good trick for that too. I just say "I had to bid this way because it seemed right to me". Partner rolls his eyes and on we go.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#27 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,724
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2008-July-31, 14:41

han, on Jul 31 2008, 10:43 AM, said:

Does anybody think it is a good idea to try for 3NT from partner's side? Does anybody have a method to do so?

I have the disturbing feeling that 3NT might be the best game, however, I have no idea how to intelligently explore it as a posisble game. Worse yet, I have the ugly feeling that exploring for 3NT might help the defense more than it helps us.

For what its worth, I normally play that 2NT is forcing, designed to explore for strain. Partner clarifies trump length

4♣+ = 4 card support, Club fragment
3N = 3 card support, little interest in a Moyisan
3♠ = 4 card Spade support and a minimum
3♥ = 3 Spades and short clubs
3♦ = 3 Spades and a minimum
3♣ = 3 Spades and short Hearts
Alderaan delenda est
0

#28 User is offline   Echognome 

  • Deipnosophist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,386
  • Joined: 2005-March-22

Posted 2008-July-31, 14:42

I can't remember the hands, but at our table my partner passed 2♠ and at the other table Bocchi bid 2♠ over 1♦ showing an invitational hand with 6♠ (at least that's what I think teammates heard it as). I remember having 4=3=4=2 or 4=2=4=3 14 count with Qxxx of spades (so wastage) and pretty good controls. I felt an invite of some kind was warranted, but just shrugged it off at the table.
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
0
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users